Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: remove vdev probe by dev args

[Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>]

On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> Please Jan, could you comment?
>

My intention was to provide a way that devices can have arbitrary
names. Ferruh correctly pointed out that this is undocumented and
hidden functionality. Lets apply this and I can rework this if it
becomes necessary later.

> 09/06/2017 11:21, Ferruh Yigit:
>> On 6/8/2017 9:45 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> > 10/05/2017 13:01, Ferruh Yigit:
>> >> Virtual device/driver probing done via name.
>> >>
>> >> A new alternative method introduced to probe the device with providing
>> >> driver name in devargs as "driver=<driver_name>".
>> >>
>> >> This patch removes alternative method and fixes virtual device usages
>> >> with proper device names.
>> >>
>> >> Fixes: 87c3bf29c642 ("test: do not short-circuit null device creation")
>> >> Fixes: d39670086a63 ("eal: parse driver argument before probing drivers")
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> >> ---
>> > [...]
>> >>  static int
>> >>  vdev_probe_all_drivers(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
>> >>  {
>> >>    const char *name;
>> >> -  char *drv_name;
>> >>    struct rte_vdev_driver *driver;
>> >>    int ret = 1;
>> >>
>> >> -  drv_name = parse_driver_arg(rte_vdev_device_args(dev));
>> >> -  name = drv_name ? drv_name : rte_vdev_device_name(dev);
>> >> +  name = rte_vdev_device_name(dev);
>> >
>> > It seems you are reverting the commit d39670086a63:
>> >     eal: parse driver argument before probing drivers
>>
>> Mostly yes.
>>
>> >
>> >     In some cases the virtual device name should be totally different than
>> >     the driver being used for the device. Therefore lets parse the devargs for
>> >     the "driver" argument before probing drivers in vdev_probe_all_drivers().
>> >
>> > Is this "driver" option useless?
>>
>> There is already a generic way to probe, why need another method, I
>> didn't get the motivation but this looks like a hack, only place I found
>> used is in bonding unit test, which can be switched to generic way
>> without this support.
>>
>> And this is a hidden / an undocumented feature.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ferruh
>>
>
>
>